Obama Is Wall Street

For those that think we should just vote in Obama for a second term, and either hold our noses or point out the old cliche of "who else is there," one really needs to read this, and take it ALL IN CAREFULLY.

The largest banks are larger than they were when Obama took office and are nearing the level of profits they were making before the depths of the financial crisis in 2008, according to government data.

Wall Street firms — independent companies and the securities-trading arms of banks — are doing even better. They earned more in the first 2¹ / ₂ years of the Obama administration than they did during the eight years of the George W. Bush administration, industry data show.

Please continue your support for Occupy Wall Street.

For more in-depth coverage of this issue, read Think Progress' take here.

Tammy Baldwin, My New Hero

Finally, someone with "balls" ready to sock it to the banking industry that has fucked the 99%. H/T to AMERICAblog.

Baldwin's resolution states that any settlement should follow three guidelines: 1) Banks that engaged in fraudulent behavior "should not be granted criminal or civil immunity for potential wrongdoing related to illegal mortgage and foreclosure practices," 2) the federal government and state AGs should "proceed with full investigations into claims of fraudulent behavior by mortgage servicers" and 3) any monetary sum paid by the banks should "appropriately compensate for, and accurately reflect, the extent of harm to all victims."

"We have to do the best we can to make innocent victims whole. But secondly, especially in light of the taxpayer bailout of the biggest banks, we owe taxpayers a solemn effort to do everything we can do to uncover what went wrong and whether laws were broken," Baldwin said in an interview with The Huffington Post. "Part of that is to make certain this won't happen again. That, to me, is one of the most basic responsibilities we have."

More On AG Settlement With Banks

I first posted on this subject here on August 22, 2011. Here's a little tidbit from Matt Taibbi's blog about this, with a very interesting point.

California Attorney General Kamala Harris sent a letter to state and federal regulators explaining that she pulled out because the proposed settlement amount for banks guilty of bad securitization practices leading up to the mortgage crisis – said to be in the $20 billion range – was too small.

[snip]

I’m convinced that the deal will eventually go through, however, after some further concessions are made. Certainly the absence of both New York (whose Attorney General Eric Schneiderman gamely started this mess by refusing to sign on or abandon his own investigation into corrupt securitization practices) and California will make it difficult for the banks to do any kind of a deal. But there is such an awesome amount of political will to get this deal done in Washington that it almost has to happen before the presidential election season really gets going.

If it does get done, expect a great deal of public debate over whether or not the size of the settlement was sufficient. Did the banks pay enough? Should they have paid ten billion more? Twenty? Even I engaged in a little bit of that some weeks ago.

But if and when that debate takes place, it will actually obscure the real issue, because this settlement is not about getting money from the banks. The deal being contemplated is actually the opposite: a giant bailout.

In fact, any federal foreclosure settlement along the lines of what’s been proposed will amount to a last round of post-2008-crisis bailouts. I talked to one foreclosure activist over the weekend who put it this way: “[The AG settlement] will be a bigger bailout than TARP.”

Another bailout. More giveaways to the 1%. Nothing fair to the 99%. And media keeps asking what is the point of OWS? Open your eyes, stupid people!

Obama Administration Not In Line With Moratorium On Foreclosures

What a stupid, pompous and Bush like stance, coming out of the White House.

White House senior adviser David Axelrod signaled Sunday that the Obama administration is opposed to a national moratorium on foreclosures, even as pressure from Congress, labor unions and consumer groups mounts for the federal government to take action.

Calling the growing evidence that lenders have used inaccurately prepared and even fraudulent documents to foreclose on homes a "serious problem," Axelrod said it had already "thrown a lot of uncertainty into the housing market that is already fragile."

"I'm not sure about a national moratorium, because there are, in fact, valid foreclosures that probably should go forward, and where the documentation and paperwork is proper," Axelrod said Sunday on CBS' "Face the Nation."

Tell me again, why I should support this administration and vote this election?

[cricket sounds]

Even with the mounting evidence of bank fraud in foreclosures, and with several banks (BofA for one) completely putting a hold on all foreclosures in all 50 states, THIS ADMINISTRATION "is not sure" that is the best way to go? For whom? The banks, of course. This is an administration, to be sure, that has NOT GOT IT'S PRIORITIES set to help the people. Please, please, don't be caught up in the orations of the President. Don't get fooled because he can talk in complete sentences and Bush couldn't. Their goals are one and the same, and these past two years shows that ... in fact, it shows the Obama Administration taking Bush's position to the extreme. Government transparency? Check. Health care for all (with public option)? Check. I have repeated this shit over and over, so no need to go into the record again. We all know Obama and friends ain't all that.

UPDATE: From the great Glenn Greenwald:

"...there is no shortage of Democrats and progressives who hurled all sorts of accusatory rhetoric at Bush and Cheney for -- as Hayden put it -- "state secrets, targeted killings, indefinite detention, renditions, the opposition to extending the right of habeas corpus to prisoners," etc., yet now either turn a blind eye to or actively defend Obama as he does exactly the same thing, and sometimes worse."

Long piece, but precisely what is in my head that I can't bang out on the computer any better.

Madoff Gets 150 Years!

U.S. District Judge Denny Chin said Madoff's breach of trust was massive, and that he lied to investors and to the SEC to buy homes, yachts and pay country club fees. He called the maximum sentence symbolic to those who might imitate the fraud and to the victims seeking relief.

"Here the message must be sent that Mr. Madoff's crimes were extraordinarily evil and that this kind of manipulation of the system is not just a bloodless crime that takes place on paper, but one instead that takes a staggering toll," Chin said.

"Not a single letter was submitted in support of Madoff," Chin said. "Not friends, not family. That is telling."

Too bad no one else on Wall Street, etc. is being sued for fraud, damn it. I'd like to see more prison sentences for those that forced Americans to have to fork over tax dollars just to pay for their salaries and bonuses.

Ken Lewis Ousted

I've been rather silent about the bank bailouts, having already expressed my opinion that the American taxpayers should not have been forced by the government to pay for their foolishness. It pissed me off when the banks refused to tell congress how they spent the money they got, and it ticks me off that there's been no oversight.

Finally, though, the shareholders (as in taxpayers) had enough.

Mr. Lewis, who helped build Bank of America into the nation’s largest bank, was stripped of his chairman’s title — a stinging blow that leaves his stewardship and legacy in doubt. At a contentious annual general meeting, angry investors held him accountable for what they view as a series of missteps that forced the once-mighty bank to accept not one but two government bailouts.

H/T to AMERICAblog that pointed out over 90,000 taxpayer proxy cards were delivered to the shareholders' meeting yesterday.

Some Serious AIG Grilling -- Anyone Need More Barbecue Sauce?

This is just astounding to watch. AIG head refuses to name the names of people who worked for AIG in the very department that caused them to go into the ground. And the asshole first claims he actually has no knowledge of the names of the employees who work for him, and secondly, he has to seek advice of counsel before providing congress with any names because, as he slips up, he starts to say that he doesn't want to provide congress or anyone else (that meaning G.Q. Public) with ammunition to do something. Yeah, like raise holy hell and file class action suits on behalf of the taxpaying people, Mr. AIG dude.

Slime, pure slime. And under Bush's watch, congress couldn't jump higher or run faster to pass the bill that gave these shitheads taxpayer money in the first place, without proper restrictions and oversight.

Is Obama Taking Us To Armageddon?

Glenn Greenwald, on Gitmo and Binyam Mohamed, who was released on Saturdy, and upon medical evaluation, appears to have been badly beaten clear up until the time of his release. But, of course, the DOD claims that Gitmo is (and has always been) free and clear of any claim of abuse of the prisoners.

For reasons that human rights groups and detainees' lawyers immediately pointed out, this self-exonerating Pentagon report, from the start, was suspect in the extreme. But a sign of how broken our discourse is and how in love with ourselves we continue to be is that, on the question of current Guantanamo conditions, the conclusions of the United States Pentagon released this week were treated not only as credible, but authoritative. If the DOD -- which has long overseen Guantanamo and continues to do so -- says that everything is great there, well, that's the end of that. What else is there to know?

This is, of course, distressful. Obama promised to close Gitmo, and now it appears he is backtracking. I thought, at least, when it came to foreign policy actions, Obama would be straight forward, but alas, that does not seem to be so.

Of all the defining practices and policies of the Bush administration which the Obama administration has already enthusiastically embraced -- and they're piling up so quickly, it's becoming difficult to keep track -- one of the most disturbing is the Obama administration's press management approach. The administration is singling out particularly supportive journalists to whom they anonymously leak purely favorable pro-administration spin; giving access to others who are have a history of such sycophantic behavior that they predictably produce profiles so one-sided and glowing that even People Magazine would be embarrassed to publish it; and -- worst of all -- they are systematically hiding behind anonymity to disseminate their claims in order to evade accountability, the exact opposite of the "transparency" Obama continuously promised (read David Cay Johnston's superb account of dealing with the Obama White House Press Office to see what a real journalist -- as opposed to one desperately jockeying to serve the White House in exchange for favored access status -- does when faced with baseless demands from administration officials for anonymity and off-the-record chatter).

I, personally, think the faulty guidance that Obama is getting stems directly from Rahm Emanuel, whom we all know did such a fantastic job as chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) [cough cough], and how he butted heads with Howard Dean's 50 state strategy. If Dean had not been so singularly focused on the 50 state strategy, and Rahm had his way, the Republicans would still be in power, and McCain would most likely be the current president. And this is whom Obama has chosen to be his White House Chief of Staff? The man who has not been right on anything for the past four years, and Obama is taking advice from him?

That's not to say that I have one shred of evidence at this point in time, but given Emanuel's track record, given the theme of Obama's campaign, "change" and Obama's promise to run the government differently, I am having a hard time in distinguishing the "difference" between Obama and Bush, outside of the fact that Obama can put together complete sentences. The advice being given to Obama is not in the best interests of this country, and although the polls still are pulling in Obama's direction, he's going to go down, and hard.

The stimulus package is too weak, the Republicans are thumbing their noses at him, the TARP money is not working, and is simply being pocketed by the rich, unemployment is through the roof, and it looks more and more like our men and women in uniform will still be fighting imaginary bogey men/women while our country drops faster than a sinkhole into a full blown depression. The only thing that is remarkably different in this scenario than with the 1930's is that the world, as a whole, is financially sinking as well.

Perhaps this is what is truly meant by Armageddon.

Are You Getting Any TARP Money? I Thought Not

A new report out of the Treasury Department Tuesday confirmed what many lawmakers, housing advocates, small businesses and individual consumers have known all along: That despite hundreds of billions of dollars flowing from Washington to the finance industry, bank lending among recipients of the Troubled Asset Relief Program fell in the last three months of 2008.

Among the 20 largest TARP recipients, median mortgage and business lending both fell by 1 percent over that span, Treasury found, while median credit card lending rose 2 percent, reflecting greater reliance on existing credit lines by consumers.”

The findings were based on a survey of the 20 banks receiving the most federal help under the TARP, and mark the first in what will be a series of monthly reports analyzing the lending trends among bailed-out banks.

Not that those banks have been particularly forthright about where the money’s going if not toward lending. In December, The Associated Press asked the 21 top TARP recipients to specify how they’re using the funds. The AP reported Tuesday: “None would provide any specifics.”

I find it funny they call it "dollars flowing from Washington," as if this isn't pretty clearly "dollars flowing from the American taxpayer." They won't tell us what they did with the money, and they won't loan it out, which is what you give the fucking bank money to do.

Aren't you 20 percenters really happy with the situation Bush left the United States of America in? Even the most die hard Republican on my office floor throws up his hands every time he sees me (this after arguing with me once in the elevator about how Bush was going to get those terrorists and the merits of America not really having to have the big nations as allies in our war on terror [cough cough, Iraq cough, cough]).

This Is "Change We Can Believe In?" NOT!

But officials said Mr. Geithner worried that the plan would not work — and could become more expensive for taxpayers — if there were too much government involvement in the affairs of the companies.

[snip]

The White House is hoping that its rescue plan will be perceived as a more coherent rescue effort than the Bush administration’s, and one whose breadth and scope are so vast that it begins to restore financial confidence in the battered markets and entices private investors to come off the sidelines.

Hoping? After last night's press conference, Obama assured the American public that there would be tight financial strings attached to the second round of TARP money.

Change we can believe in? I'm laughing so hard my coffee is coming out of my nose. Obama may be able to give a great speech, but he seems incompetent to get anything "changed" in Washington.

Hilzoy's take is exceptional. Give it your entire attention. Long piece, but well worth the read.

You can see the issue in a nutshell in this passage from the NYT:

"And for all of its boldness, the plan largely repeats the Bush administration's approach of deferring to many of the same companies and executives who had peddled risky loans and investments at the heart of the crisis and failed to foresee many of the problems plaguing the markets."

Obama may have been much more eloquent in saying pretty much the same thing Bush has always said: "It's hard work being President."